6 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 35 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side — they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Ethelberth v. Choice Security Co..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ethelberth v. Choice Security Co. Anchor | green | “engagement in interstate commerce, either by an employee or by the employer as a whole, is a prerequisite for liability for the flsa's overtime requirement.” | 7 |
| 2 | Hart v. Rick's Cabaret International Inc. | green | “there appears to have never been a case in which a worker was held to be an employee for purposes of the flsa but not the nyll (or vice versa).” | 7 |
| 3 | Martin v. Sprint United Management Co. | green | “accordingly, courts in this district regularly apply the same tests to determine whether entities were joint employers under nyll and the flsa.” | 6 |
| 4 | Hart v. Rick's Cabaret International Inc. | green | “there is general support for giving flsa and the nyll consistent interpretations . . . and there appears to have never been a case in which a worker was held to be an employee for purposes of the flsa but not the nyll (or vice versa).” | 6 |
| 5 | Hart v. Rick's Cabaret International Inc. | green | “and the crucial inquiry, in determining whether an employer-employee relationship exists, is the 'degree of control exercised by the purported employer over the results produced or the means used to achieve the results.” | 5 |
| 6 | Martin v. Sprint United Management Co. | green | “courts in this district regularly apply the same tests to determine whether entities were joint employers under nyll and the flsa.” | 4 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment — for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.